More Thoughts on Theories and Projects

[jennythereader]

I realized that when I talked about my theory in an earlier post, I forgot to say why I think authors write more about people from their own type of generation.

So, this is my thinking, and what I'm planning to do, laid out (more-or-less) using the Scientific Method:

Hypotheses: In general people find it easiest to understand historical figures from generations that are the same type as the one they were born into.

Prediction: If the hypotheses is true, there will be more books for which the author and the main subject are from the same generation or the same type of generation than random chance would account for. Award winning books for which the author and subject are from matching generation types should outnumber books with mis-matched authors/subjects by an even wider margin.

Experiment: I plan to read modern contemporary fiction, older contemporary fiction, historical fiction, and biographies and track how the author's position in the Strauss-Howe generational cycle compares to that of their main charcters or biographical subjects. I'll also track what (if any) awards each book has won, and what sort of reputation the book has in academic circles. If a Cliff Notes (or similar) reading guide is available I may start with that, only turning to the book itself if the reading guide doesn't have the level of detail I'm looking for.

Comments

[seawasp]

Hm. I looked at the chart and while I fall into the 13th Generation (born 1962) I feel much more akin to the prior generation overall; the descriptions of Gen X/13th don't fit, while those of the Boomers, especially Idealist, fit me much better.

[jennythe-reader.livejournal.com]

I assume the borders of all of these generations are a little blurry. It's like when you look at the color spectrum: The differences between red, purple, and blue are obvious; but where exactly you draw the line between red and purple or purple and blue isn't always easy to pin down.